Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T13:42:42.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early assessment of the likely cost-effectiveness of a new technology: A Markov model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis of computer-assisted total knee replacement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2006

Hengjin Dong  and
Martin Buxton
Hengjin Dong
Affiliation:
Brunel University
Martin Buxton
Affiliation:
Brunel University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study is to apply a Markov model to compare cost-effectiveness of total knee replacement (TKR) using computer-assisted surgery (CAS) with that of TKR using a conventional manual method in the absence of formal clinical trial evidence.

Methods: A structured search was carried out to identify evidence relating to the clinical outcome, cost, and effectiveness of TKR. Nine Markov states were identified based on the progress of the disease after TKR. Effectiveness was expressed by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The simulation was carried out initially for 120 cycles of a month each, starting with 1,000 TKRs. A discount rate of 3.5 percent was used for both cost and effectiveness in the incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. Then, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was carried out using a Monte Carlo approach with 10,000 iterations.

Results: Computer-assisted TKR was a long-term cost-effective technology, but the QALYs gained were small. After the first 2 years, the incremental cost per QALY of computer-assisted TKR was dominant because of cheaper and more QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was sensitive to the “effect of CAS,” to the CAS extra cost, and to the utility of the state “Normal health after primary TKR,” but it was not sensitive to utilities of other Markov states. Both probabilistic and deterministic analyses produced similar cumulative serious or minor complication rates and complex or simple revision rates. They also produced similar ICERs.

Conclusions: Compared with conventional TKR, computer-assisted TKR is a cost-saving technology in the long-term and may offer small additional QALYs. The “effect of CAS” is to reduce revision rates and complications through more accurate and precise alignment, and although the conclusions from the model, even when allowing for a full probabilistic analysis of uncertainty, are clear, the “effect of CAS” on the rate of revisions awaits long-term clinical evidence.

Keywords

Total knee replacementComputer-assisted surgeryCost-effectiveness analysisIncremental cost-effectiveness ratioQALYMarkov model
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , April 2006 , pp. 191 - 202
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Gaudenzi A. 1988 Patellofemoral functional results and complications with the posterior stabilized total condylar knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 3: 17– 25.Google Scholar
Argenson JN, Aubaniac JM. 2000 Total knee arthroplasty in femorotibial instability. Orthopade. 29 (Suppl 1): S45– S47.Google Scholar
2003. Australian Orthopaedic Association NJRR. Annual report 2003. Adelaide: AOA;
Bachmeier CJ, March LM, Cross MJ, et al. 2001 A comparison of outcomes in osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement surgery. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 9: 137– 146.Google Scholar
Badhe N, Dewnany G, Livesley PJ. 2001 Should the patella be replaced in total knee replacement? Int Orthop. 25: 97– 99.Google Scholar
Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, et al. 2004 Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computer-assisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 86: 682– 687.Google Scholar
Beaupre LA, Davies DM, Jones CA, Cinats JG. 2001 Exercise combined with continuous passive motion or slider board therapy compared with exercise only: A randomized controlled trial of patients following total knee arthroplasty. Phys Ther. 81: 1029– 1037.Google Scholar
Berger RA, Rubash HE, Seel MJ, Thompson WH, Crossett LS. 1993: Determining the rotational alignment of the femoral component in total knee arthroplasty using the epicondylar axis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 40– 47.Google Scholar
Bert JM, Gross M, Kline C. 2001 Patient demand matching in total knee arthroplasty: Is it necessary? Am J Knee Surg. 14: 39– 42.Google Scholar
Briggs A, Sculpher M. 1998 An introduction to Markov modelling for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics. 13: 397– 409.Google Scholar
Briggs AH, Ades AE, Price MJ. 2003 Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for decision trees with multiple branches: Use of the Dirichlet distribution in a Bayesian framework. Med Decis Making. 23: 341– 350.Google Scholar
Briggs AH, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O'Brien BJ. 2002 Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: Choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making. 22: 290– 308.Google Scholar
Calder JD, Ashwood N, Hollingdale JP. 1999 Survivorship analysis of the “Performance” total knee replacement–7-year follow-up. Int Orthop. 23: 100– 103.Google Scholar
2002. Canadian Institute for Health Information. Canadian joint replacement registry 2002 report, total hip and total knee replacement in Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information;
2003. Canadian Institute for Health Information. Canadian joint replacement registry 2003 report, total hip and total knee replacement in Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information;
2004. Canadian Institute for Health Information. Canadian joint replacement registry 2004 report, total hip and total knee replacement in Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information;
Chauhan SK, Clark GW, Lloyd S, et al. 2004 Computer-assisted total knee replacement. A controlled cadaver study using a multi-parameter quantitative CT assessment of alignment (the Perth CT Protocol). J Bone Joint Surg Br. 86: 818– 823.Google Scholar
Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ. 2004 Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 86: 372– 377.Google Scholar
Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, et al. 2005 Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: Not an optional extra. Health Econ. 14: 339– 347.Google Scholar
Curtis L, Netten A. 2004. Unit costs of health and social care 2004. Kent: Personal Social Services Research Unit, The University of Kent;
Delp SL, Stulberg SD, Davies B, Picard F, Leitner F. 1998: Computer assisted knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 49– 56.Google Scholar
2004. Department of Health. National service framework for older people. London: Department of Health;
Department of Health. 2004. NHS Reference Costs 2003 and National Tariff 2004. London: Department of Health;
Dorr LD, Boiardo RA. 1986: Technical considerations in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 5– 11.Google Scholar
Figgie HE III, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG, Moller HS III, Gordon NH. 1986 The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 68: 1035– 1040.Google Scholar
Fortin PR, Clarke AE, Joseph L, et al. 1999 Outcomes of total hip and knee replacement: Preoperative functional status predicts outcomes at six months after surgery. Arthritis Rheum. 42: 1722– 1728.Google Scholar
Garg A, Walker PS. 1990 Prediction of total knee motion using a three-dimensional computer-graphics model. J Biomech. 23: 45– 58.Google Scholar
Gaweda K, Jablonski M. 2000 Function of patellofemoral joints after total knee replacement with polyethylene patellar articular surface in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. J Orthopaed Traumatol. 2: 79– 82.Google Scholar
Gibbons CE, Solan MC, Ricketts DM, Patterson M. 2001 Cryotherapy compared with Robert Jones bandage after total knee replacement: A prospective randomized trial. Int Orthop. 25: 250– 252.Google Scholar
Gutierrez B, Culler SD, Freund DA. 1998 Does hospital procedure-specific volume affect treatment costs? A national study of knee replacement surgery. Health Serv Res. 33 (pt 1): 489– 511.Google Scholar
Hassaballa MA, Porteous AJ, Newman JH. 2004 Observed kneeling ability after total, unicompartmental and patellofemoral knee arthroplasty: Perception versus reality. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 12: 136– 139.Google Scholar
Her Majesty's Treasury. Appraisal and evaluation in central government. Available at: URL://greenbook.treasury.gov.uk 2003.
Jacobson JJ, Schweitzer SO, Kowalski CJ. 1991 Chemoprophylaxis of prosthetic joint patients during dental treatment: A decision-utility analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 72: 167– 177.Google Scholar
Jenny JY, Jenny G. 1998 Preservation of anterior cruciate ligament in total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 118: 145– 148.Google Scholar
Jensen C, Rofail S. 1999 Knee injury and obesity in patients undergoing total knee replacement: A retrospective study in 115 patients. J Orthop Sci. 4: 5– 7.Google Scholar
Kane RL, Saleh KJ, Wilt TJ, et al. 2003. Total knee replacement. Evidence report/technology assessment No. 86 (prepared by Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota). AHRQ Publication No. 04-E006-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;
Krackow KA. 1990. The technique of total knee arthroplasty. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby;
Kulkarni SK, Freeman MA, Poal-Manresa JC, Asencio JI, Rodriguez JJ. 2001 The patello-femoral joint in total knee arthroplasty: Is the design of the trochlea the critical factor? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 9 (Suppl 1): S8– S12.Google Scholar
Lavernia CJ, Guzman JF, Gachupin-Garcia A. 1997: Cost effectiveness and quality of life in knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 134– 139.Google Scholar
Lozano Gomez MR, Ruiz Fernandez J, Lopez Alonso A, Gomez Pellico L. 1997 Long-term results of the treatment of severe osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis with 193 total knee replacements. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 5: 102– 112.Google Scholar
Borroff MJ. 2004. The cost-effectiveness of screening for aseptic loosening following total hip replacement. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield;
2004. National Statistics. Mortality statistics (Series DH1 no. 35). London: Office for National Statistics;
2004. NHS National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NHS National Institute for Clinical Excellence;
Oswald MH, Jakob RP, Schneider E, Hoogewoud HM. 1993 Radiological analysis of normal axial alignment of femur and tibia in view of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 8: 419– 426.Google Scholar
Piazza SJ, Delp SL, Stulberg SD, Stern SH. 1998 Posterior tilting of the tibial component decreases femoral rollback in posterior-substituting knee replacement: A computer simulation study. J Orthop Res. 16: 264– 270.Google Scholar
Rissanen P, Aro S, Sintonen H, et al. 1997 Costs and cost-effectiveness in hip and knee replacements. A prospective study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 13: 575– 588.Google Scholar
Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L. 2001 The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register 1975–1997: An update with special emphasis on 41,223 knees operated on in 1988-1997. Acta Orthop Scand. 72: 503– 513.Google Scholar
Rorabeck CH, Murray P. 1997 Cost effectiveness of revision total knee replacement. Instr Course Lect. 46: 237– 240.Google Scholar
Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. 1997 The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2: 26– 30.Google Scholar
Sparmann M, Wolke B, Czupalla H, Banzer D, Zink A. 2003 Positioning of total knee arthroplasty with and without navigation support. A prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 85: 830– 835.Google Scholar
Tennant A, Fear J, Pickering A, et al. 1995 Prevalence of knee problems in the population aged 55 years and over: Identifying the need for knee arthroplasty. BMJ. 310: 1291– 1293.Google Scholar
2003. The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register. Annual report 2003. Stockholm: The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register;
Townley C. 1985. The anatomic total knee: Instrumentation and alignment technique. The knee: Papers of the first scientific meeting of the knee society. Baltimore: University Press;
Vince KG, Insall JN, Kelly MA. 1989 The total condylar prosthesis. 10- to 12-year results of a cemented knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 71: 793– 797.Google Scholar
Wasielewski RC, Galante JO, Leighty RM, Natarajan RN, Rosenberg AG. Wear patterns on retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts and their relationship to technical considerations during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994: 31– 43.Google Scholar